Comparison of four ActiGraph accelerometers during walking and running - PubMed (original) (raw)

Comparative Study

Comparison of four ActiGraph accelerometers during walking and running

Dinesh John et al. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2010 Feb.

Abstract

Currently, researchers can use the ActiGraph 7164 or one of three different versions of the ActiGraph GT1M to objectively measure physical activity.

Purpose: To determine whether differences exist between activity counts from the ActiGraph 7164 and the three versions of the GT1M at given walking and running speeds.

Methods: Ten male participants (23.6 +/- 2.7 yr) completed treadmill walking and running at 10 different speeds (3-min stages) while wearing the ActiGraph 7164 and the latest GT1M (GT1M-V3) or the GT1M version one (GT1M-V1) and the GT1M version two (GT1M-V2). Participants walked at 3, 5, and 7 km x h(-1) followed by running at 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and 20 km x h(-1). The accelerometers were worn on an elastic belt around the waist over the left and right sides of the hip. Testing was performed on different days using a counterbalanced within-subjects design to account for potential differences attributable to accelerometer placement. At each speed, a one-way repeated-measures ANOVA was used to examine differences between activity counts in counts per minute (cpm). Post hoc pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni adjustments were used where appropriate.

Results: There were no significant differences between activity counts at any given walking or running speed (P < 0.05). At all running speeds, activity counts from the ActiGraph 7164 and GT1M-V2 displayed the lowest and highest values, respectively. Output from all accelerometers peaked at 14 km x h(-1) (mean range = 8974 +/- 677 to 9412 +/- 982 cpm) and then gradually declined at higher speeds. The mean difference score at peak output between the ActiGraph 7164 and GT1M-V2 was 439 +/- 565 cpm.

Conclusions: There were no statistically significant differences between outputs from all the accelerometers, indicating that researchers can select any of the four ActiGraph accelerometers in doing research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1

Mean ± SE of activity counts during walking.

Figure 2

Figure 2

Mean ± SE of activity counts during running.

Figure 3

Figure 3

Bland-Altman plots assessing agreement with increasing activity counts between (A) Actigraph 7164 and GT1M-V1, (B) Actigraph 7164 and GT1M-V2, and (C) Actigraph 7164 and GT1M-V3. Solid line depicts mean activity count difference between devices and dashed lines depict ± 2 standard deviations of mean activity count difference.

Figure 3

Figure 3

Bland-Altman plots assessing agreement with increasing activity counts between (A) Actigraph 7164 and GT1M-V1, (B) Actigraph 7164 and GT1M-V2, and (C) Actigraph 7164 and GT1M-V3. Solid line depicts mean activity count difference between devices and dashed lines depict ± 2 standard deviations of mean activity count difference.

Figure 3

Figure 3

Bland-Altman plots assessing agreement with increasing activity counts between (A) Actigraph 7164 and GT1M-V1, (B) Actigraph 7164 and GT1M-V2, and (C) Actigraph 7164 and GT1M-V3. Solid line depicts mean activity count difference between devices and dashed lines depict ± 2 standard deviations of mean activity count difference.

Figure 4

Figure 4

Walking and running energy expenditure estimated using the ACSM equation and predicted from mean GT1M-V3 activity counts using the Freedson, and Crouter regression equations.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Bhattacharya A, McCutcheon EP, Shvartz E, Greenleaf JE. Body acceleration distribution and O2 uptake in humans during running and jumping. J Appl Physiol. 1980;49(5):881–887. - PubMed
    1. Bouten CV, Koekkoek KT, Verduin M, Kodde R, Janssen JD. A triaxial accelerometer and portable data processing unit for the assessment of daily physical activity. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1997;44(3):136–147. - PubMed
    1. Brage S, Wedderkopp N, Franks PW, Andersen LB, Froberg K. Reexamination of validity and reliability of the CSA monitor in walking and running. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003;35(8):1447–1454. - PubMed
    1. Cavagna G, Saibene F, Margaria R. A three-directional accelerometer for analyzing body movements. J Appl Physiol. 1961;16:191. - PubMed
    1. Chen KY, Bassett DR., Jr. The technology of accelerometry-based activity monitors: current and future. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2005;37(11 Suppl):S490–S500. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Grants and funding

LinkOut - more resources